- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2015 17:14:03 +1100
- To: Ryan Sleevi <sleevi@google.com>
- Cc: "www-tag@w3.org List" <www-tag@w3.org>
> On 16 Feb 2015, at 4:59 pm, Ryan Sleevi <sleevi@google.com> wrote: > > The overall topic is that you've presented as "An Issue" for the TAG a > question of how users use and administer their machines, and whether > the TAG should intervene. I'm (hopefully clearly) rather opposed to > this. That's a concise statement of the problem, thanks. Note, however, that I'm NOT suggesting that the TAG intervene, on two fronts: a) I'm suggesting that the TAG *talk* about it as an architectural issue -- where the actual "intervention" happens is TBD b) I'm not suggesting that we constrain or otherwise specify *how* users use and administer their machines -- I'm wondering if browsers need to expose different / more information about the machines they're running on, and/or whether users need more education about it. > If this is the criteria for the TAG getting involved, why not focus on > the fact that UAs now tend to expose Developer Tools, and these > Developer Tools may be used for nefarious purposes. [1] Indeed. My older son is now known as a "hacker" at his high school, due to his elite devtools skills... > Should the TAG > provide guidance on how developers should be allowed to modify the > DOM? Or guidance for Site Authors on how to prevent modifications to > the DOM? Should the W3C provide security UI guidance for users who > open their Developer Tools, discouraging them from the evil that may > await? > > You may see it as presenting strawmen, Indeed. > but I'm trying to show how your > stated criteria provides a very shaky foundation, one which quickly > encroaches on things I hope we all know to be Terribly Bad Ideas for > the W3C to be involved in, and hopefully to demonstrate that this is > equally one of those Terribly Bad Ideas. Perhaps it's your perception of the criteria which is on a shaky foundation... Cheers, -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/
Received on Monday, 16 February 2015 06:14:33 UTC